On Monday, Mike Reiss ofESPNBoston.com got the inside scoop from New England PatriotsRFA guard Logan Mankins, and there was a new twist. Per Reiss, Mankins said that he will not be signing his tender and that "I want to be traded. I don't need to be here any more." Yowza!

Responding to a fellow Twitterer on Monday, Adam Caplan of Scout.com indicated that a fair asking price in trade for Mankins is a first-round draft pick. It remains to be seen whether any other team is willing to ante up that bounty andthe requisite deal required to make Mankins happy. ESPN AFC West blogger Bill Williamson assessed the chances for each of that division's teams making the trade on Tuesday (see box at right), while his counterpart for the NFC North, Kevin Seifert, assessed the only real possibility for that division -- the Chicago Bears -- ultimately coming to the conclusion that it's very unlikely for three big reasons.

So how big would Mankins' new deal need to be? Well, Albert Breer of the Boston Globereported that there was a deal from the Patriots on the table for "a significant period of time" that would've made Mankins one of the top-five guards in the NFL, salary-wise. It was reportedly a five-year deal, worth about $7 million per season. While that sounds like a lot, the Jahri Evans deal was for seven years and $56.7 million.

Tim Graham

"[The Evans deal] sets the bar for the game's elite guards and Mankins qualifies. He's an unsigned restricted free agent. He would've been an unrestricted free agent this year if not for special rules for the uncapped season. Mankins was New England's first-round pick in 2005 and has been to a pair of Pro Bowls. Evans, a fourth-round draft choice, is entering his fifth season. He's coming off his first Pro Bowl campaign."

Well it looks like a concensus has been taken and by a majority noone seems too thinks he would be a good fit. Attitude and his lack of flexibility in which defense he'ld like to play in will hinder his chances of ever playing in a NE Patriots uni.,he will wind up in Detroit if the Skins cut him,you can mark that down as a done deal. Schwartz was his coach in Tennessee.

Texpat, I was going to agree with you, but when you say such things like "Mankins is better than Evans" and "Chung suks" it makes think you have no idea what you're talking about. Haynesworth playing DE in NE would solve all our pass-rushing problems. Mankins is acting like Reevis, he wants at least a penny more than what Evans got. I wish the Pats would get rid of him. He's the only guy missing from camp. He's messing with the vibe the Pats are trying to build. Posted by 49Patriots

I second that. It does seem like he has a personel beef with some players.

Don't be fooled. It's about the 4/3. That's where Haynesworth made his name. Going to a 3/4 carries different responsiblities and would hurt his status.

There are perhaps better reasons why he won't be a Patriot. Haynesworth is a bit of a circus and you don't know what you get from day to day. Plus, I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer. What do the Pats look for in a player and tell me if Haynesworth is a fit? He fails so many catagories.

Here's that insider info on Mankins... On Monday, Mike Reiss of ESPNBoston.com got the inside scoop from New England Patriots RFA guard Logan Mankins , and there was a new twist. Per Reiss, Mankins said that he will not be signing his tender and that "I want to be traded. I don't need to be here any more." Yowza! Responding to a fellow Twitterer on Monday, Adam Caplan of Scout.com indicated that a fair asking price in trade for Mankins is a first-round draft pick . It remains to be seen whether any other team is willing to ante up that bounty and the requisite deal required to make Mankins happy. ESPN AFC West blogger Bill Williamson assessed the chances for each of that division's teams making the trade on Tuesday (see box at right), while his counterpart for the NFC North, Kevin Seifert, assessed the only real possibility for that division -- the Chicago Bears -- ultimately coming to the conclusion that it's very unlikely for three big reasons . So how big would Mankins' new deal need to be? Well, Albert Breer of the Boston Globe reported that there was a deal from the Patriots on the table for "a significant period of time" that would've made Mankins one of the top-five guards in the NFL, salary-wise. It was reportedly a five-year deal, worth about $7 million per season. While that sounds like a lot, the Jahri Evans deal was for seven years and $56.7 million. Does Mankins really deserve such a big contract? Here's ESPN.com AFC East blogger Tim Graham: Tim Graham Mankins deserves it "[The Evans deal] sets the bar for the game's elite guards and Mankins qualifies. He's an unsigned restricted free agent. He would've been an unrestricted free agent this year if not for special rules for the uncapped season. Mankins was New England's first-round pick in 2005 and has been to a pair of Pro Bowls. Evans, a fourth-round draft choice, is entering his fifth season. He's coming off his first Pro Bowl campaign."Posted by Payment84

They are comparable but Evans has the edge in my book. He is younger by 2 years. And like Mankins he started every game since arriving in the league. Evans was a 4th round pick. Mankins was a 1st rd'er. So the money both were making was pretty far apart, im sure. The Saints also paid Evans as if he were an unrestricted free agent. The Patriots normally dont operate like that, either.

Don't be fooled. It's about the 4/3. That's where Haynesworth made his name. Going to a 3/4 carries different responsiblities and would hurt his status. There are perhaps better reasons why he won't be a Patriot. Haynesworth is a bit of a circus and you don't know what you get from day to day. Plus, I don't think he's the sharpest knife in the drawer. What do the Pats look for in a player and tell me if Haynesworth is a fit? He fails so many catagories.Posted by garytx

So, what's this evidence of him not being smart or 'sharp' as you put it?

Texpat, I was going to agree with you, but when you say such things like "Mankins is better than Evans" and "Chung suks" it makes think you have no idea what you're talking about. Haynesworth playing DE in NE would solve all our pass-rushing problems. Mankins is acting like Reevis, he wants at least a penny more than what Evans got. I wish the Pats would get rid of him. He's the only guy missing from camp. He's messing with the vibe the Pats are trying to build. Posted by 49Patriots

I stand by what I said about Chung. The guy showed little in his rookie season. Based on what I've seen, the he has difficulties in coverage.

If, as a couple of posters have stated, Evans is known to be a better player than Mankins, than why does Mankins feel that he is entitled to Evans-like money? Is his ego getting in the way of common sense?

If the price is right I think the Pats would most certainly kick the tires on a Big Albert signing. It doesnt have to be for Mankins because I think the SKins will release him. NE has a boatload of draft picks next year if they truly do try to trade for him. I agree that a front line of Ty, Vince, and Albert would be scary for opposing teams but to say Albert is a better athlete and player than Richard Seymour isnt true.

In Response to Re: Haynesworth announces he wants traded. Do the Pats make a deal for Mankins? : I stand by what I said about Chung. The guy showed little in his rookie season. Based on what I've seen, the he has difficulties in coverage. As for Evans, I admit that I spoke without researching who Evans is as a player...and what he's accomplished in a relatively short time: http://www.neworleans.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=312593&Itemid=4395 If, as a couple of posters have stated, Evans is known to be a better player than Mankins, than why does Mankins feel that he is entitled to Evans-like money? Is his ego getting in the way of common sense? Posted by TexasPat3

He was a rookie with 3 proven vets in front of him and a playbook to learn. Rookie DBs usually work their way up into more time by standing out on special teams. And thats where he made a mark last season. Look for him this season to make a leap along with Darius Butler.

Mankins started as a rookie but he wasnt very good. He really started because of need. Safety wasnt a great need last season it was pass rush(OLB).

In Response to Re: Haynesworth announces he wants traded. Do the Pats make a deal for Mankins? : I stand by what I said about Chung. The guy showed little in his rookie season. Based on what I've seen, the he has difficulties in coverage. As for Evans, I admit that I spoke without researching who Evans is as a player...and what he's accomplished in a relatively short time: http://www.neworleans.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=312593&Itemid=4395 If, as a couple of posters have stated, Evans is known to be a better player than Mankins, than why does Mankins feel that he is entitled to Evans-like money? Is his ego getting in the way of common sense? Posted by TexasPat3

It's all about pride with these guys. Reevis, who's only had one season of dominance, wants to be paid as much as the guy who's been doing it for years in Nnamdi. A couple of seasons ago, Boldin wanted Fitzgerald money even though Larry is clearly a way better WR than Boldin.

They don't care if they earned it. They just care about cashing it. Mankins needs to go, he doesn't have the heart of a champion. He's just like Asante Samuel. All he cares about is getting paid, but when the Pats needed them to step up in SB42 they were MIA.

In Response to Re: Haynesworth announces he wants traded. Do the Pats make a deal for Mankins? : He was a rookie with 3 proven vets in front of him and a playbook to learn. Rookie DBs usually work their way up into more time by standing out on special teams. And thats where he made a mark last season. Look for him this season to make a leap along with Darius Butler. Posted by datdude401

I don't condone his behavior, but I wouldn't want to play under the Dan Snyder regime either. It's one of the worst run organizations in football only rivaling Oakland, Detroit, Cincy (not as much anymore), Buffalo, the Jets, etc.Posted by russgriswold

Russ...you don't see a serious character flaw in Haynesworth? He graciously accepts a boatload of money, that sets him and his next three generations of family members up in luxury for life...yet he has no gratitude or loyalty for the man (Danny Synder) who made that all possible?? How can anyone depend on a guy like this?

I think Haynesworth does have some character issues. But, are these issues related to how Washington wanted to use him or used him last year, or are they more of who this guy is?

We could have said the same thing about Randy Moss before he came to NE, as he checked out of many a game with the Raiders. But, a new team, legit QB and good team with structure did wonders for him. Would this prove effective for turning Big Al around?

These are questions I don't have the answer to, and it's hard to gauge what he is really like other than what we read.

If we consider Big Al's past play plus his potential, and for a minute don't consider the character stuff because it's hard to make heads or tales from that, you can't help but want this guy on our team. He would add a very critical piece to our defense that was a glaring weakness last year, plus could be this year.

He is a huge upgrade over GWarren and Lewis, and is better built to play 3-4 RDE than either of them.

Apples and oranges, Russ. The Raiders traded for Moss, and agreed to take on Randy's huge contract, which he had signed with the Minnesota Vikings. The Raiders never signed Moss to a huge deal...and made him rich for generations to come...like Danny Snyder did with Haynesworth: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48428-2005Feb23.html

Moss got tired of losing and playing with inferior QBs. So, he held out...and took a pay cut in order to facilitate his eventual trade to the Patriots.

All I am saying is, if Logan Mankins can't be moved for a late 1st rd or very high 2nd rd pick and say some kind of additional mid rder, which is very likely considering the labor conditions and his demands, then why not pull the trigger on Haynesworth?

RESPONSE: Russ...the Pats don't have to trade him. He has no leverage. They can let him sit, if they choose. If the Pats wanted Haynesworth, they could likely get him for a 5th round pick...far less than Mankins. If the Pats stick to their guns, they'll either sign Mankins...or will find a team thats' willing to part with a #1 draft choice for him.

I think it's worth the gamble. The idea should be to offset Mankins's value/loss of impact and get it back in some other fashion.

RESPONSE: As you correctly point out, Haynesworth is a gamble...while a team knows what Mankins will give them. Wouldn't getting a #1 pick be a better solution...especially when the Redskins are on the verge of releasing Haynesworth?

Haynesworth contract is also attractive now, while Mankins's is not. I agree his stance in Washington is childish and makes him look bad, but does Mankins situaiton here when you think about it.

RESPONSE: Trading Mankins in 2010 is a lot easier than trading him when a salary cap was in place...because teams that want him don't have to create cap room to sign him.

If the Pats would entertain Haynesworth, I woudl rather cough up a draft pick then let him hit the open market. I think there would be a ton of competition for his services. I'd gladly part with a 5th rounder for him.

TexPat...I tend to now agree with you. I think a Mankins for Haynesworth trade is not in the Pats best interest, IF Washington would take a mid round draft pick for him. When it's all said and done, I would not want Mankins to sit out this year. He has trade value and if he is unwilling to play for either the contract that was offered or the amount he was tendered, I'm trading him away. he does no good for us on the bench.

Looking across the league at teams that need good, quality starting G's, and can afford Mankins, what about KC, Tampa, Lions?

i think that the mankins dispute will be settled and he will sign with us long term. I think that both parties will make concessions pats will up the offer a little and mankins will lower his asking price and they will get a deal done.

We don't want haynesworth to get cut, because if he were to be cut his very favorable contract (~5 million per season for the next 3 years) would be void and he would hit the open market thus driving up his price. By offering washington a pick even if it is a 5th round or less it keeps his contract locked and gives us sole possession of his services without competition.

"Abraham Lincoln once said that people are generally about as happy as they make their minds up to be. If that is true, then it can be said that just about everyone involved in the ongoing cold war between Washington Redskins management and Albert Haynesworth must have made their minds up to be unhappy about the situation.

That has to be the case because if they were relying on the facts of the matter, happiness would abound.

One of the prerequisites for making that kind of case would be that Haynesworth did not perform as well for Washington last year as he did in his last couple of seasons with the Tennessee Titans. A tape review analysis I did of Haynesworth's past three seasons says that simply isn't the case.

Let's start with his numbers against the run.

The core metric for gauging a defender's run-stuffing ability is the point of attack (POA) win percentage metric. This statistic credits a player with a POA attempt whenever he is at the area where the ball carrier attacked the line of scrimmage. A POA win is given whenever the defender does beats his blocker and negatively impacts the play.

In the two seasons prior to signing with Washington, Haynesworth posted POA win totals of 32.3 percent (2007) and 23.8 percent (2008). Those totals are the baseline against which Haynesworth's 2009 run-stuffing performance should be gauged.

Let's check out his POA numbers from last season. He had eighty-one POA attempts and twenty-seven POA wins. That equates to a 33.3 percent POA win rate, or a total that was actually higher than both his 2007 and 2008 figures.

Haynesworth also met expectations in the area of contact splash plays. A contact splash play is defined as when a defender does something to physically impact a passing play, such as getting a sack, tipping a pass or hitting the quarterback while he is throwing the ball. He notched 20.5 of these over the course of 27 games in 2007-2008, or an average of about three-quarters of a contact splash play per game. In 2009 Haynesworth notched nine of these plays in twelve games, a total that equals the aforementioned three-quarters per game mark.

Those figures beg the question of why Washington is reportedly trying to trade him, but the unhappiness isn't just in the Redskins' front office. Haynesworth himself did not attend the team's offseason OTAs in part due to his being miffed about the team's switching him from playing a 4-3 under tackle position to a 3-4 nose tackle spot.

The thought of being on the receiving end of more double-team blocks might seem like a reasonable reason for Haynesworth to be upset, but a closer look at the numbers once again shows the facts don't back the emotion.

The statistical evidence for this comes from an analysis I did on the volume of double-team blocks some of the top-level 3-4 nose tackles -- Casey Hampton, Vince Wilfork and Kris Jenkins -- saw in 2009. Hampton saw two blockers 56.4 percent of the time, Wilfork 50.5 percent and Jenkins 51.4 percent.

Now contrast those totals against Haynesworth's 39.5 percent double-team percentage -- that means he saw two or more blockers last year nearly as often as some of the top nose tackles in the league. To put this another way, if the 3-4 Haynesworth saw the same volume of POA runs as he did in a 4-3 front last year (81), and he saw a 10-15 percent increase in double-team percentage (which would put him at the same level as the elite nose tackles), it would mean an increase of 8-12 double-teams over the course of the entire season.

To be fair, Haynesworth did play in only 12 games last year, but even if four extra games are factored in, it would still mean that -- at worst -- he would see about one extra double-team per game. That simply doesn't seem to be enough of a reason for Haynesworth to skip the OTAs.

I'd take Albert...but I would tell him he maybe playing some 34End. I would also play a heck of alot more 4-3 with him on the roster. We have several OLB/DE who can play 4-3 end, like burgess. The weak like would likely be LB's as we have too many ILB and not enough OLB in that type of D. With Albert, if you get him for 3 and 9...you grab him. I'd give up Mankins, or do a pick trade for both.

Like several Patriots' fans here, some Indianapolis Colts' fans have asked about whether the Colts should try to land Albert Haynesworth. Check out this interesting view from Colts' columnist Mike Chappell on the subject:

QUESTION: Do you see any possibility of the Colts being interested in Albert Haynesworth?-- from Clark, Frederick, MD

ANSWER: Boy, I certainly hope not. Haynesworth is a talent, no question. At times he has been one of the top defensive tackles in the NFL. But there are way too many red flags with him. The main one is last off-season he signed a $100 million contract with the Washington Redskins that included about $41 million in guarantees. And one year into the deal, he's unhappy, apparently is going to skip a mandatory minicamp and wants a trade. Are you kidding me? A lot of players this offseason are unhappy with their contracts - Reggie Wayne and Robert Mathis of the Colts, running back Chris Johnson with the Tennessee Titans, New York Jets cornerback Darrelle Revis. But for Haynesworth to pull this is pretty hard to swallow. Some advice for any team that decides to trade for him: Buyer beware.

Look....Haynesworth has only been in Washington for ONE season, ONE season. He hasn't forgotten how to be a dominate defensive player in one year.

What personality disputes happened in Washington has no bearing on what happens in NE, period.

Cory Dillion ripped his uniform off and threw his shoulder pads into the stands in Cinn after his final game there. He comes here for a second round pick and proceeds to become Clock Killen’ Cory Dillion and rips off a 1600 yd season.

Oakland was giddy when the traded Moss here for a 4th as Oakland’s expert staff assured the management that his legs were shot and couldn’t eve run anymore. Then he and Brady become the most prolific passing duo in the history of the NFL.

As Bill Parcells liked to say “there are no choir boys in the NFL folks”

Don’t worry about Albert in DC.

You don’t think Bill would talk with him first? Tell him what kind of defense we run and how he would fit in? Of course he would. If Bill felt OK with it he would make the deal.

I am not convinced big Al is against the 3/4 defense I’m more convinced he against his situation as it stands in Washington and his view of management.

His upside is too good to easily dismiss. With a pass happy league it’s all about getting to and disrupting the QB.